Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

View

Discuss

Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

concealment writes "On November 27, RapidShare will start putting a tight cap on outbound downloads for its free users. Paid members will still have 30 gigabytes in outbound downloads per day, but everybody else will be capped at one gigabyte. The change is expected to further deter pirates from using RapidShare to distribute copyright material on a large scale."

In the future RapidShare will use a classic hosting model which means that not only the storage space but also the traffic created will be paid solely by the owner of the file. The prices will not change. With RapidPro you automatically have unlimited traffic for your own downloads of your files and the downloads by your contacts. Additionally you have 30 GB public traffic per day. The recipients of your files have no download limitations whatsoever regardless of if they have RapidPro, a free account or no account at all! [rapidshare.com]

They're really limiting the total downloads of a file by people who aren't in your contacts list. So really you need to pay for an account and get other uploaders to add you to their contact list, otherwise you'll still get snocked trying to download other's files when they reach the daily cap.

I doubt very much that this will raise Rapidshare's revenue significantly. Nor do I think it will decrease "illegal" downloads significantly. You're just going to see less of them be HD (750MB rather than 1.5GB).

Of course, in the meantime we have this "6 strikes" plan that the ISPs have put together, which has been much delayed, and which they have seriously screwed up at least once. (Turns out their "independent" expert who signed off on the technology was formerly a lobbyist for Big Content, so now the

...BitTorrent? I know it's not actually a host (more just a system to make you the host) but I've personally used torrents almost exclusively over the years for file sharing and never ran into the slightest hoops or hurdles. And I'm saying this for legal and, naturally, pirated files I've uploaded and downloaded.

Conjecture on my part, but when you pay for an account, you give them some information, so that they can get their money. To a non-infringing free downloader, the cap is an inconvenience, and some fraction of them will be willing to pay to make it go away. To a copyright-infringing free downloader, paying to remove the cap requires them to identify, and possibly incriminate, themselves, so it's more of an obstacle.

This explanation is incomplete, of course, since presumably the uploader is also on the hook f

This explanation is incomplete, of course, since presumably the uploader is also on the hook for copyright violation, and you have to register an account to upload anything (I think), but there are few uploaders and many downloaders, so the explanation above could still work on average.

One who needs some manner by which they can pay for that which they're registering. Did you miss the part about paying for more upload space/bandwidth, or do you seriously think RapidShare will accept payments via throwing a plain manila envelope full of unmarked bills off a bridge at 2am?

One who needs some manner by which they can pay for that which they're registering.

Prepaid VISA cards FTW - No one online gets my "real" contact info unless I need something physically shipped to me - And even then, I almost always have it shipped to my work address c/o my phone extension - Technically enough to ID me with two court orders (merchant and my employer), but good luck otherwise.

Did you miss the part about paying for more upload space/bandwidth, or do you seriously think RapidShare will accept payments via throwing a plain manila envelope full of unmarked bills off a bridge at 2am?

You do realize this conversation involves a company that used to (maybe they still do, haven't looked in years) accept payments through some sketchy Russian "bill it to your phone via SMS" processor, right?

Well, Rapidshare accepts PayPal, so that's at least one level of removal. If someone wanted to find out who that RS account belongs to, they'd have to go for IP address from RS, then go to the relevant ISP to get the customer details (good luck with that in most countries), or go to PayPal to get the c/card details of the payment. Not sure what PayPal's policy is on that - hopefully would require an actual subpoena (good luck with that).

Right - but I wouldn't use the same name for Rapidshare if I were to create an account there, at least for any shady business. I think you can even find my real name from my usual nickname if you look hard enough, I don't particularly care about that.

Don't get your hopes up about komoot, I tried to use the Android app as a bicycle satnav, but it didn't work too well. OpenRouteService (with OsmAnd) is much better.:-)

The flaw in your theory, is that no one has been convicted of DOWNLOADING stuff like this, to my knowledge. It's the people who SHARE that get raped by RIAA and their ilk. All of those huge settlement cases we've read about involved UPLOADING. So many people fail to understand that torrents and other P2P clients upload and download at the same time, unless you dick around in the settings.

It might be a money grab. But riddle me this, holy Antisharkspray.
Legit services will do this to you:

Steam will cut you off of your sizeable and paid for and possibly extensive games library simply for moving into another region.
Amazon will cut you off of your whole Kindle library simply for moving into another region.

This is not even for real but only contractual law since publishing rights still honour the outmoded notion of country borders.
Would you accept if you were to move to Europe to forfeit everything you ever bought on Kindle, Steam, or any other sevice?

Copyright stuff has moved beyond the usual 100 years after creator's death + Disney shenanigans into the crazy realm of publishing rights into however the world got carved up into publishing rights areas.

I for one have deDRMed my whole Kindle-bought Batman collection just in case I might want to move away and if I put it onto Rapidshare just to protect my investment then it shouldn't be viewed as outlawnessnessitude but a failure of copyright law. Took me a whole weekend. Which in turn made me realise I spend too much on Batman.
Also, Batman.
Copyrightpublisherlaw shouldn't stand a chance of a snowball in hell but it instead thrives like The Penguin in Nomansland. How come?
Comply?
COMPLY!

Sorry, try as I might, the pirates offer the better service.

While I deDRMed my Batman collection I went on search for my favourite childhood radio show. Amazon had an offer for the first 4 shows of 40. The second episode cost 30€ from "affiliiates". Nada, zip, zilch for the next 36 episodes. So I went for another online shop. Same misery, less cutthroat. 36 episodes not published. And even if they were, it still would have been 10€ per episode. Pay 400€ for stuff I recorded from radio to tape as a kid? I could afford that but guess who took to Teh Mighty Internets to torrent that stuff from kids who managed to have backups of their old tapes? Worse even still, the originals got lost and they tried to restore it from amateurs who still had recordings in their attic.

Current copyright reality is worse than the fire in the Library of Alexandria. Copy that floppy and shoot a lawyer.

I beg of you, just because somebody carved up the world into publishing areas and only stuff that will offer short term yield will get archived(read: put into the back catalogue) copy the hell out of that stuff. Future generations will thank you.

Incidentally by the way, at the modern Library of Alexandria resides the mirror of the Internet Archive.

You are not alone in commenting about the service. Valve's Gabe Newell has said "In general, we think there is a fundamental misconception about piracy. Piracy is almost always a service problem and not a pricing problem."

Steam will cut you off of your sizeable and paid for and possibly extensive games library simply for moving into another region.
Amazon will cut you off of your whole Kindle library simply for moving into another region.

It gets worse than that. I was on vacation in Germany last month, and had a couple extra hours to kill at the hotel one night. So I fired up my Amazon Prime account to watch some movies on Amazon instant video. Not authorized in the area. Same with Netflix and Hulu.

I had to run an SSH proxy through one of my web hosting servers to trick these services into thinking I was still in the U.S., but very few people know how to and have the resources to do that. This whole anachronistic distribution and publishing rights by region has got to die. I try to be a legit customer, paying for my movies and music. But if this is what's going to happen, I'm ripping everything I buy and making my own copies regardless of what silly laws they get passed. If I can't bypass the DRM, I'm downloading the pirated version of my legitimately bought media.

Yep, and then there's free-to-air TV. If I want to watch Batman Begins or whatever with NO ADS, I can either record it from the TV - which is perfectly legal - or I can download it and watch it - which is somehow illegal, even though it's exactly the same thing.

i concur, having worked tirelessly to restore a beloved series that had it's masters destroyed decades ago in a fit of lack-of-foresight. bootleggers are all we have sometimes. people who have the courage to, when presented with a reel of film and instructed to burn it, will keep the reel and say "it's burnt".

Steam will cut you off of your sizeable and paid for and possibly extensive games library simply for moving into another region.Amazon will cut you off of your whole Kindle library simply for moving into another region.

You forgot Apple.

Otherwise I'm in full agreement - this is why I keep "spare" copies of everything I buy digitally and/or will probably support Mega when it comes out.

I have 3 bloody Apple accounts right now that I've used in 3 different countries I've lived in over the last few years. As a result I get emails from Apple in 3 languages about the same 3 shitty (but pretty) products every time there's a new release. (Yes, I have a reason to keep those coming in).

Why would this reduce piracy more than it would reduce legitimate uses?

It probably won't make the slightest difference to either group. Legitimate users are likely to pay anyway. And savvier kids have been streaming video and music, or using peer to peer, for a long time. Not all do, as evidenced by megaupload's downfall, but they're quick learners when it comes to downloading stuff on the web.

Not to mention it does jack shit to actually protect them from liability. The law doesn't say it's okay to pirate "this much" material and you're okay. If you pirate at all you're liable. If their business support piracy, no matter the amount thereof, they will be taken down as well. It's simply a matter of time.

Just like the roads will be shut down if any amount of criminals drive on them, right? The law doesn't prevent you from selling goods and services that a criminal could use in furtherance of a crime, in that case you probably couldn't sell a tooth pick without going to jail. It's only when something is popular with criminals and rare among lawful citizens they start reacting. It doesn't matter how much The Pirate Bay and Google are both search engines in principle, in practical reality one is going to get b

look, if I could go with limited caps( AND CENSORING) why the fuck would I be putting it on rapidshare in the first place ?

sounds to me that even dropbox has the drop-kick on rapidshare now(I always thought that rapidshares waiting system for free downloads looked and felt like shit too - by the way if you've already removed the fucking file don't fucking show those wait dialogs to users, it just pisses them off).

30GB/day is really ridiculous for a paid service, unless there's some other larger plan.
I mean, legal downloads...
Just imagine a 100 MB application/movie being downloaded 300 times a day... it's either a toy or something it won't interest anyone.

If you are the author of a 100 MB application or a 100 MB movie, why are you using RapidShare in the first place? You could just get a domain and get some $7/mo hosting plan that claims "Unlimited Bandwidth!!!111" like Go Daddy's.

I'll assume that by "ROMs", you mean community-made Android system images like CyanogenMod, not infringing copies of classic video games. But why are they hosted on RapidShare as opposed to hosting them on a site dedicated to Android system images?

It sounds to me like this is designed to prevent people from downloading HD-quality movies. In the old days, you could click, wait your sixty seconds and then start the download, and a half-hour later have your movie.

I guess their policy of policing music blogs is assumed to take care of the music piracy.

Either way, as the article pointed out, these changes are to keep the regulators happy, more than they are designed to actually curb piracy.

I'm surprised that RS has any momentum left. The original "Rapids" debacle was what, three years ago? Why would anyone still bother to pay for their service after all that has happened since then?

It's has already been the case for some time that you never RS links at the two web hotspots beloved of for-profit uploaders... personal blogs and forums that allow anonymous browsing. RS is apparently content to kick out all the pirates and get by with a fraction of their former traffic.

There are legit uses for the download sites. I pay and keep a membership with one because it offers links which are one-click downloads for the receivers. This I use for an acting troupe I'm in to store documents, as well as MP3 files of presentations. Yes, I could use YouTube, but for something which is intended only for a private group, I much rather have it in a place where I control, so I can respect the wishes of the presenters. With the downloads only coming from one authorized site that I have ac

was not determined by the number of pirates it supported. Megaupload failed because it did not have a system in place to hand kickbacks to the cartels (the RIAA and MPAA respectively.)
rapidshare needs to create a system by which they pay the protection racket. if not, expect a few busted windows and broken signs.
kims model differs substantially in that not only does he refuse to pay blood money, he has decided to flat-out intrude on the cartels stamping ground with his own digital content distribution

If I come across content that is served by Rapidshare, I don't bother getting it because its usually not worth the effort to try and get something off that POS service.

Seriously, BitTorrent is more then adequate to share both legit and illegal content without BS pay walls and content throttling. Why anybody uses RapidShare or MegaUpload to share content in this day and age speaks to a group of ex-geeks that were relevant back in the early 90's but haven't learned or done anything new since then. its like people that share files using RAR to break them into a thousand pieces because of old Usenet group limitations, absolutely no point to do that in this day an age of broadband and torrent services.

RapidShare and other file download services are like AOL where the last few remnants of old-school geeks and vapid Luddites still believe they need some kind of portal to access web content at a time when torrent and cloud services has become the most prevalent way to share any content.

Yea personally I use newsgroups (My local telco VDSL service still offers free newsgroup access with up to 5 simultaneous downloads at once), I use torrents, kat.ph/thepiratebay.se/h33t.com or other private/pseudo-private sites.

And for some smaller stuff like ebooks, some latest and greatest apps that haven't hit torrent yet, I can find them on Tor darknet on a.onion site usually a day or 2 before they wind up on the mass torrent sites.

newsgroups also have some rare shit you wont get on torrents like on de

Third world and not-so-third world countries have crappy ISPs that block torrents, or similar P2P stuff.A few years ago, in Argentina, several ISPs did this, and rapidshare/megaupload gained a lot of users. Nowdays, no ISP blocks p2p (except in small towns perhaps), but users are still used to file sharing sites, and huge communities have grown around them.

...since charges of piracy are so ridiculously inflated. If you download the discography of your favorite musician, that's usually under 1GB and can contain hundreds of songs. Each one of those violations could come down on RapidShare's head. So just one user using one day's worth of bandwidth is enough "piracy" to end RapidShare.

Last time I used Rapidshare as a free user the download was throttled to some absurdly slow rate (5-10kbps IIRC). Also, you were limited to 1 download at a time and there was a 30 minute window between downloads. Downloading a gigabyte in a day over that kind of connection should be rewarded, not punished. Someone had to work really hard to get those bits.

Another question is how far their revenue will drop from now on. Sure, the chance of being sued is likely to be reduced, but so is the probability of their actual user base shrinking - including paying customers.

Looking the other way on what was rather commonly known as a piracy haven might have been a great deal more profitable than the company realizes (or, perhaps, simply more than they fear). Once the content's no longer there neither will users.

What I want to see is a site similar to Rapidshare or Megaupload or MediaFire that uses client-side encryption (even the actual name of the file would be part of the opaque blob). Heck, build a system (presumably using a cypher that is designed to be good with random seeking in the file if such a cypher exists) that can play videos in the client (where the video player would take the key as input and decrypt on the fly). So like YouTube except that the hosting provider never sees the content and is unable to pre-screen it.

So without the key all you get is some kind of ID for the file (just start at 0 or 1 and keep going up) and an opaque AES encrypted blob.

Harder for the media companies to send take-down notices (as they would be unable to use their regular automated system and would have to have a human manually find the decryption key for the content in whichever blog post, forum post or other location the link itself was found in.

I am rather opposed to the idea that there even is such a thing as "intellectual property", with one exception: commercial and competitive use without payment: that seems unwise for all of us in the long run (I HATE fairness it's a devil theory, but. Not being reciprocal in important i.e. Survival or business related matters-that violates whatever - common sense, the Golden Rule, the Commandment, The US Constitution, and/or whatever few actually legitimate statutes as may exist).